IMPORTANT: JREF Forums is now the International Skeptics Forum. If you are a past member of the JREF Forums you must agree to the new terms and conditions to post, send PMs, or continue to use the forum as a member. You can view them here, or you will be presented with them when you try to make a post or PM or similar.

Your private information was removed in transferring to the new forum. If you'd like to import it please see the instructions in this thread to approve transfer.
If you are having problems accessing the Forum you can contact Darat at isforum@internationalskeptics.com, please include your username and forum email address in any email.
NOTE:** TAPATALK access is currently disabled **. This is just while we work out how to ensure people have to agree to the T&Cs before posting here via Tapatalk

Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

These studies were no longer "matching" in any way, and 7 of 8 homeopathic trials tested only one medicine without any of the typical individualization of treatment that is commonly used in homeopathy.

Fitting that he posted this under an article about buying homeopathic allergy spray. So... does this mean he agrees that the spray does not work, since there's no individualization?

I know I shouldn't be surprised that Ullman is still spamming his utter misunderstanding of that Lancet study all over the internet, but really. It's almost as though several people hadn't explained to him why his interpretation was completely wrong.

I stll think the difference between "small" and "nothing at all" is measurable.

Some homoeopathic preparations do have measurable amounts (less than 12C).

However, in desensitisation, the concentrations progressively increase, but I would imagine that with homoeopathy where less is more, the dilutions would progressively increase.
That doesn't sound like the same principle to me. More like opposites.

The good news here is that Enric now knows about this important body of research and this notable Lancet editorial. Will he or you bring it to the homeopathy article? By the way, I have no problem if you also referenced the Lewith study of 202 patients, though you will also need to acknowledge that this was not a real replication. Amongst its many differences, it only allowed 3 (!) doses of a medicine during a 4-month period. THAT was not the protocol used by Reilly, and his letter to the editor is notable in this drama. If you need the specific references, just ask. It will be curious to watch this. I sincerely hope that you take the high road. No wonder you guys want me blocked.

Unfortunately, he is banned from homeopathy topics, leading to this:-

Quote:

"However, suggesting specific edits would not be acceptable under the current restrictions, since this would be editing by proxy"[3]. 6 hours and 10 minutes to break the ban restrictions after they were made clear on an arbitration case page. Impressive.
The fact that Dana adds a bad faith assumption at the end makes it even worse (we don't want you blocked, Dana, we want you to start respecting wikipedia policies and stop disrupting the pages by pushing studies)

... Finally, I am not a homeopath. I am not even an expert on homeopathy. I am simply a homeopathy consumer. I use homeopathy because I have observed empirically that there is a temporal correlation between using a remedy and being relieved of symptoms. The correlation is not perfect, but it "works" often enough that I am happy to give it a try first. If I can use this to summon up the placebo effect at will, why not? It is very cheap, and it has virtually no side effects. If my symptoms disappear and don't come back, what's wrong with that?

But I am a skeptic and scientifically minded as well, ...

Scientifically minded, and using homeopathy. Do you know the word oxymoron?

I think this may be the same person who is now typing at "Science-Based Medicine" on what constitutes "science" because the scientists there are all wrong. And Helen knows because she is married to a PhD chemist.

"Numerous sports greats have bragged about their use of homeopathic medicines including David Beckham"

From The Mail On Sunday

''David Beckham has never exactly been celebrated for his intellect, but even his greatest critics will be surprised by his latest confession: he can't understand his six-year-old son's maths homework.

The England captain made his remarks when doing an interview with The Mail on Sunday's Live magazine.

He admitted that when Brooklyn asked for help with a school assignment recently, he was baffled - and had to turn to his wife Victoria for assistance.

"Their homework is so hard these days," said Beckham. "I sat down with Brooklyn the other day - and I was like, 'Victoria, maybe you should do the homework tonight.''